OCinBuffalo

Me too. And that's why I like the pick.

Yeah, that's exactly what happened in Miami last year.

Game, set, match. Thanks for confirming my premise = that you are going to B word no matter what happens. And, I bet that if you thought you could get away with it, you'd B word if this team went 11-5.

Bad drafts do effect teams for years. True, but irrelevant. This is about people who are bitching for the sake of bitching. And my logic does work-->a rebuild is a rebuild, what possible difference does it make whether the 7,8 or 9 players we draft this year are good or not, a new FO and coach puts every player on the team in question anyway i.e. what if the new guys want to run 3-4 D or West Coast offense? Nice try, but you apparently don't understand what happens when a new GM, never mind just a new head coach, is hired.

Right. And yes, this means YOU Rico ...Badobilz...and the rest of the "B word no matter what" crowd. If you are so convinced that Jauron is bad, then why would you feel a need to keep finding reasons to confirm that?....unless you weren't very convinced, or, you just enjoy bitching.

Then you get to complain all you want. Just try to keep it to one Pettigrew/"we better take a DE/OT"/TO post a week please.

Think about it. IF you want him gone, then you want him to do the things today, this season, that you say "always fail". Let's assume the Jauron haters are right: 1. Jauron drafts DBs too often and drafting DBs instead of other positions is the reason we lose 2. Jauron won't draft the fat guys high enough. 3. Jauron is a bad coach on gameday in terms of his decisions 4. This year the draft moves that are made are: not drafting lineman, or not drafting enough of them, or drafting a safety or WR 1st, etc. 5. (Fill in the rest of the reasons you don't like him or things that he will do that will fail) Then, let's assume the results of the 2009 season, moves and all, are another 7-9 season or worse. We can expect Jauron, and others, to get canned. Isn't that what you wanted in the first place? Jauron will not be fired if the Bills go 11-5 and make the playoffs....and prove that he knows, and you....don't. So, if Jauron does the things that you think are going to fail, you don't get to complain for the next 5 months, because according to you, these things will make him, and the team, fail. IF he fails because of the things he does, that you say are wrong, then he is gone, which is what you wanted to begin with. That is, unless you are wrong....

Yeah but that doesn't really make you feel better if you miss your 1st round guy like these guys are talking about.

And and a very convenient explanation as to why the prognosticator in question got the pick wrong. IF the team doesn't take who he said they would, then gets off the hook by calling their pick a reach. Now the attention is focused on the team doing something wrong, instead of him not getting the pick right. Of course, all of the above is not applicable if we are talking about the NY Jets. (ahem, Gholston, cough)

I have been thinking this might happen with someone trying to get Gonzalez. #11 is perfectly positioned...it's out of the top ten, it's ahead of all the other teams who might take him...except Jacksonville and Seattle. If he gets by both of those teams a trade up to us becomes a distinct possibility. I'd even say it would be probable.

"If Martin is drafted or signed as a free agent, he’ll be the 24th Canadian Interuniversity Sport player, and fifth Mustang, to make an NFL roster." Only the Canadians would come up with something that goofy. You work had to try to see them as equals, just regular guys. You tell yourself: I have a Canadian friend, and he is a good guy. You think: he's not goofy, why do I think Canadians are goofy? I shouldn't think that. And then you read this.

Well, since 5.) is obvious, what else are we supposed to do? our work? our school work? no way man, it's draft weekend!

My most hated is adding an "a" in front of players names, as in "at 27 you starting thinking about a John Doe or a Englebert Humperdink". I don't see the point in saying "a" when you could just say the player's name. Bah: MattyT beat me to it.

I think this makes some sense if: 1. You believe that Everette Brown is a one trick pony that hasn't really learned the game at FSU/too small/too short. 2. Orakapo is gone 3. Raji is gone 4. There is no OT worth taking at 11, especially if the guys that are left can be had at 28. 5. You are sure that Ayers isn't that good/worth taking at 11 6. You are sure that Maybin is a better 3-4 OLB than a Cover 2 DE 7. We don't draft that damn safety....that will force me to become a member of the BillinNYC club 8. You can't get the mental image of: Andre Smith's funbags bouncing around while he was "sprinting" at the combine, out of your head. YUCK. That's a lot of IFs though....

I dunno. Jim Kelly got some crazy deal in 1994 or 5 that was like $20 mil for the next 8 years(edit: well, that was crazy back then ) or whatever, and everybody knew it was BS and there was no way he would play that long. Marino got one right after that was the same thing. I remember at the time ESPN(forget who) said something along the lines of: "Sometimes the FO gives agents super contracts even though they know the player will retire before completing, just to get the agent big press...in the hopes that the agent will return the favor later on."

Let me get this straight: We have an obvious, documented "Ted Turner moment", and instead of being angry at these GE managers for meddling with free speech by using lame, passive aggressive tactics...all you can do is talk about Fox, things you don't like that "bad" people said, and that Obama shouldn't be criticized. What the f does that have to do with the topic of this thread? What a bunch of retards. How about staying on the f'ing point? -->The Ted Turner-like activity. I swear to God if this came out about Fox News, the thread would be 5 pages long and we'd have the usual suspects calling for beheadings. Could you people be more hypocritical? And just so you retards understand: Ted Turner CREATED Fox News! His lame attempts to force his message on people, by trying to force anchors to read the little pieces of paper he would hand them on commercial, created the very premise Rupert Murdoch used to start Fox News. Great plan there Ted ...nothing like destroying your monopoly in cable news, creating a competitor that kicks the crap out of you, and getting your ass fired from your own company, ultimately resulting in your BS agenda being confounded and your BS message going unheard...basically the exact opposite of what you set out to do. The irony is hysterical. Looks like these GE managers are doing the same thing. Well, good, anybody who is willing to trade with Iran should be fired anyway. I am setting the over/under on Immelt at 2 quarters. O'Reilly is already dogging him consistently. With O'Reilly's history of "piling on" after the fact, I am sure that he has been told that Immelt is already on the way out.

And if the world stopped and started at your convenience you would be right, but it doesn't, so you are not. The point is there's no way in hell you can start a "let's trade for Stroud" plan intentionally. Certainly not a year and a half in advance. The point is that you stockpile value in every move you make, and then spend that when and where you can get the best bang for the buck. They used pick after pick, trade after trade to stockpile value, and then spent it immediately when Stroud came available. The end of the argument point is: they could not have acted on Stroud had they not made the moves they made, and that's all that ultimately matters.

So the good results we got were not in fact good results, just lucky results...therefore, according to your logic, the bad results the Eagles got must not be bad results, but merely unlucky results? Dude, we traded them a guy we KNEW was a peg leg and a guy who wasn't worth a bag a balls for a starting DT. In what universe doesn't that qualify and an owning? There's not much "analysis" needed if you can get a team that is as well off as the Eagles to buy your injured/crap with starting talent. If I was the Bills FO, I'd be thinking, "well I screwed em last time, why wouldn't they fall for it again?" Also, then how do you explain the McGahee trade? Lucky as well?

The trade went down like this: To Eagles: Kelly Holcomb and Takeo Spikes To Bills: Darwin Walker and what ended up being a 7th. Result For Bills: Bills trade Walker to Chicago for their 5th, use their 5th and their extra 3rd(from Baltimore) to get Marcus Stroud. Bills use 7th for Steve Johnson --> who I think is going to be very good. Result for Eagles: Spikes and Holcomb both released after the 2008 season. Holcomb did not play, Spikes did little other than get hurt, again. Media(and some posters here) at the time: "The Bills can't keep recycling players" "The Bills are giving away their whole team" "The Bills didn't get value/could have gotten more for Spikes" "The Bills just traded their best LB, and one of the best players on the team for nothing other than a malcontent DT" etc. etc. etc. Clearly the media(and some posters here) were astoundingly wrong in their assessment of that trade. Clearly the Bills absolutely owned the Eagles on that trade. Clearly this same front office absolutely owned the Ravens on the McGahee trade. Clearly posters here love to invoke historical statistics and "who did what" divided by "# of championships", etc. So my question is: If you look at this FO objectively(I know that is impossible for some here), and measure them based on their track record of trades they have made so far, how can you automatically assume that they are wrong, when all they have been is 100% right? The historical statistics have our current FO 2, Other guys 0, in trades with existing players, and I would call the Poz trade up an easy win as well. Why should we ignore these stats? What makes you think that the same guys who got us Stroud, Johnson and Poz for McGahee(now backup RB) and Spikes(now playing for SF, what else do you need to know?), have screwed up so MASSIVELY with Peters?

I did.

Classic. Micheal Moore in the flesh. I will fill in the rest of the facts, it will be just like Madlibs. with an average pay approaching a whopping $20 a month. God, if only we could aspire to make that much a month, all our problems would be solved. Yes let's all live here. This is much better than the last 3 penthouse apartments I have lived in. And who wouldn't want that snazzy car to go along with your sh!thole apartment. That costs 30% of GNP, leaving nothing left for things like food, clothes, medicine, equipment, etc. On it's face, they simply don't have the $$$ to support their healthcare program, unless they burglarize it from other areas, which they do of course. But, this allows them to say: see, we have good free PREVENTATIVE health care...just don't get hepatitis or anything else that requires mostly meds, not surgery, to fix. Buffoonery. They don't have vaccines, they don't have antibiotics, they don't have friggin aspirin, because they can't afford to buy it on the open market...because they spent all their $$$ training and providing for docs. Buffoonery. We eat crap food, smoke too much, drink too much, don't work manual labor jobs...Cuba does the exact opposite, but we have an equal life expectancy. We are crushing ourselves health wise, they are like Jack La fing lane, because they are in poverty and are largely only fit for manual labor, yet we live the same amount of time. There is only one reason that makes that possible: our health care system runs circles around everyone else's, combined. Our health care problems: people die because we give them too many meds because we are giving out so much care that we can't even track all the data properly Their health care problems: people die because they don't get the meds in the first place. There's no comparison. Our problems come from excess of resources and care, theirs come from misappropriation of resources they don't even really have without stealing them from other parts of the economy.

The fact is that Cuba trains the hell out of doctors and it trains a lot of them. There's no denying that. But, in typical Michael Moore "sin of omission" fashion, he leaves out that the cost of doing so consumes almost all of their health care budget, leaving out the little things like equipment, meds, beds, physical plants, modern buildings, y'know, the unimportant stuff. And, in typical Communist fashion, who needs all the facts when you can focus on one out of ten to make your point, and then go around casting aspersions on people who dare to point out the whole truth?

Buffonery. Castro's entire power base, and the reason his terrible economy was propped up by the Russians all those years(but has gotten much worse since they stopped paying), has all been predicated on being our "enemy". There is a 0% chance that they will ever be our ally until the retarded communists are removed once and for all, because they make too much money as our "enemy". Yes, and there has been no justification to remove it either. Besides, the first damn Canadian you run into tells you how cool they are because they can go to Cuba and you can't, so it's not like they don't get tourists. And, that's the point. What do we get if we open up relations...besides another massive influx of uneducated workers? New places to go and spend our money? We already have that. So, again, what do we get vs. what do they get? Sure, just as soon as they pay off all the people/companies, most of whom are still alive, that they stole from. We can learn exactly NOTHING about either, other than how to suck on a grand scale, how to fix tests on a grand scale, how to completely fail to teach people technology, and how to way, way, WAY, overpay for training doctors. EDIT: I almost forgot, perhaps they can teach us the "everybody gets a new pot" economic stimulus plan they ran a couple of years ago. Hey, it's practical, and at least we might actually get something useful out of all this government spending.

What a jackass! Asking NYC cop if he's been living under a rock. Yeah, I'm so sure bitter old bastards rate higher than NYC police on the relevance and/or awareness meters. More evidence for my "RI is a phony, (doesn't-really)-know-it-all" theory. And yeah, Bill, it appears you are right, they are so affected they simply cannot help themselves. I saw your "kudos" in the pirate thread(hmm, that sounds kinda cool for some reason) and thought the same thing.

No. I agree that Obama is very likely honest and intelligent. How else could he have come out of Chicago without 1000 scandals? He had to be extremely honest to resist those scumbags, and extremely smart to avoid their entanglements without them getting their hooks into him(benefit of the doubt). The problem is not whether he is honest and intelligent, the problem is his other traits.(or the traits of his people) Let me put on my "ex-big 6" hat for a second and in that persona, tell you what they are likely to be thinking: (Disclaimer: There's a reason I don't work for them anymore, and won't ever, no matter how many recruiters they send) "I think Obama is a "f'ing lamb", and so are his people. I think any strategic/enterprise IT management consultant, sees a client like Obama and his people and starts licking their chops, so we need to get to them first. They have all the things you want in a client: 1. hubris 2. ignorance and no time to get a clue 3. a need to see every problem as simple therefore quickly and easily solved, and need to tell others(US taxpayers) that the problem is being solved 4. deeeeeeep pockets 5. the seriously mistaken belief that they are smarter than we are 6. power drunk This means that we will ask for ridiculous sums of money, get it because they can't be seen as "not getting it" and they "wanna be" just as elite as we are(don't forget this is a persona), pay us, and then lock us in because they won't be able to walk away from the $$$ they already dumped into our projects. Basically we will rob them blind, and they will thank us for it; they'll even defend us. Essentially the mother of all "emporer's new clothes" scenarios, and I get to write government checks to myself." There's a lot more, but I don't like that persona, and I trust the point has been made. As I said, Obama is very likely honest and intelligent, but if he is also the other things I have listed, and more importantly, if his people are, it won't matter. They will be $10 Billion into it before they know it, and by then it will be too late.